This approach [of the "Confession of Faith Against Ecumenism"] is at variance with the policy of the Ecumenical Patriarchate and, increasingly, the body of local Orthodox Churches which are involved in the painstaking dialogue and progress towards restoring communion between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church undertaken by the International Theological Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue, and with the active participation of the Orthodox Church in the work of the World Council of Churches and the Faith and Order Commission. For these a ‘theology of return’ has been set aside, as in Roman Catholic circles, it being recognised that visible Christian unity and re-integration is unlikely to be achieved by insisting that the various sides abandon their tradition and positions and convert to others. Instead, it is envisaged that through dialogue and friendship, no tradition should surrender its integrity but, instead, grow in theological, spiritual and pastoral awareness of the others towards finding a common mind in Christ, reflected faithfully in each Christian tradition, and towards realising greater unity and ultimately communion. Furthermore, it cannot be a threat to tradition and integrity to receive from others what accords, or comes to accord, with them through this growth.
From the blog of the Pontifical Society of St John Chrysostom (UK and Europe)
The “fly in the ointment” is the recognition of traditions other than one’s own as valid expressions of Christianity deserving respect.
Those who signed this anti-ecumenical confession no longer seek God – they already seem to posess Him (at least this is what they claim).
They know exactly what He wants and especially what He doesn’t want and where the Holy Ghost definitely cannot be – they know Him perfectly since they claim to know exactly what Truth is.
Astonishing.
Two recent podcasts by Dr Bouteneff on the Confession: http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/sweeter
Isn’t this a little problematic? Doesn’t anyone else here think that this is problematic?
I mean, they pretty much acknowledge that since the way of repentance isn’t going work – its just not “pragmatic” – then union will just have to come about by relativism and compromise. . .
Questions:
1. Can tradition “grow”?
2. Do we find the mind of Christ by “growing” through “awareness” of others’ “equally valid” tradition?
3. Is communion achieved through this broadened awareness?
4. Is the mind of Christ reflected faithfully in each “Christian tradition”?
1. Tradition doesn’t grow unless it is human tradition we are talking about, not the Presence and Action of the Holy Spirit in the Church – which is what Tradition means in Orthodoxy. That is Holy Tradition and it is One, just as God and the Church is One. There can be no equality in diversity in THIS kind of Tradition – just acceptance and experience of It.
2. The Mind of Christ is not a matter acheived on the “horizontal plane” but the vertical. That is, it is acheived, or rather, bestowed on those made worthy through repentance, tears, obedience, faith, etc. It is a gift to the worthy – again, not a man-made achievement obtained through human dialogue, but divine-human dialogue, and most of all repentance. It certainly won’t be found in conference rooms among those whose nous (intellect) is as of yet still weaker and unfit than his rational mind (dianoia). It is, better, a matter of the head in the heart, not “exterior knowledge”, not more ABOUT the other, but more about the One. And, above all, the Church is not seeking to find the mind of Christ outside of Herself, but within.
3. The state of the man who is constantly seeking outside of himself the meaning of life and illumination is a sad state, a pathetic state, belonging not the ascetic (i.e. the theologian) but to the worldly man. Communion, moreover, when found on the horizontal plane, must necessarily exist beforehand on the vertical plane. One simply recognizes in the other what he himself experiences. He sees in the other the same Lord He experiences within himself. He need NOT search for that which he already has. When he encounters it, he simply recognizes it. And it doesn’t take long. Hence, the admonition of the Lord and His Apostles not to tarry long with those who have erred in the Faith, those who refuse to listen to the Church, that is, with the heretical man – the one holding another view of Christ and His Church because he has a different experience of Him.
4. The mind of Christ is not reflected faithfully in each tradition for the simple reason that each tradition, each “church”, has not the same confession of Faith, and hence the same experience of Christ. That is not a subjective opinion of some ill-disposed malcontent, but an objective fact. One’s confession of Faith reflects one’s experience of God. One’s life gives birth to one’s perception and confession.
But, moreover, a variation of the branch theory is quite evident here, since if each “tradition” has faithfully kept and maintained the mind of Christ, it must be an equally valid experience of Christ and hence a vehicle of the Holy Spirit and part of the Body of Christ.
Certainly, even those who can’t accept the Confession of Faith here aren’t ready to accept the above quote of the Pontifical Society either.
Panagiotis
By the way, after listening to Dr. Bouteneff’s podcasts, you’ll want to listen to this response to them, which is quite well documented and presented:
Heresy vs. Truth: A Response to Dr. Peter Bouteneff
http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/heresy-vs-truth-a-response-to-dr-peter-bouteneff.aspx